avon b7

elijahg said:

The dumbest thing here is Apple won't let you (or third party apps) block a range of numbers. Why can't I block +1 800 *, or +1 800 850 {0-999} for example? Or

… (more)

indeed block or silence anyone who's not in my contacts? 

Try this for unknown callers...

https://support.apple.com/en-us/111106#:~:text=To turn on Silence Unknown,in your recent calls list. 
(less)

It's all basically nonsense and definitely has nothing to do with the blanket claim of 'national security'.

Even the Pentagon still relies on waivers to skirt 'obligations'. 

… (more)https://fortune.com/asia/2024/07/03/pentagon-huawei-ban-national-defense-authorization-act/

Much of the internet ends up running over vast networks of fibreoptic cables and Huawei has laid (and manages) thousands of km of underwater lines. 

The so called 'clean networks' that the US tries to promote (while trying to keep a straight face) are also nonsense.

Huawei offered to licence its entire 5G stack to a US consortium (just to allow it to have something of 'its own' to control) but the US refused.

The reality is (and always was) that the US sees China as being able to overtake it in key areas and instead of trying to compete with better products and technologies it chooses to try and bludgeon any rival out of the game. 

That includes 'allies' who used Chinese technology (5G for example) and who refused to play along. Just ask Boris. 

https://www.ft.com/content/a70f9506-48f1-11ea-aee2-9ddbdc86190d

https://frontierindia.com/cias-black-ops-led-the-uk-to-drop-huawei-5g-book-reveals/?srsltid=AfmBOopICiosJ_OrLJshH8Hvh5XsjrMdXnaWYFfPhtMlbJg6G-7Q_XcV&utm_content=cmp-true

The UK was a prime example, seeing its 5G capacity and performance crumple into one of the worst in the EU and costing billions in the process. 

As a result China has become more self sufficient and is on an accelerated path to further self sufficiency. 

Erradicating TP-Link from US systems will do nothing to enhance national security and using Cisco might even make things riskier! Maybe that's tongue in cheek.

The internet is what it is, and has to be, for what we expect of it even if the US (and China too) would like to see it split apart in order to gain more 'control'. 

I believe Trump once put forward the idea of an 'American 5G' and had to be 'informed' of reality. If that is true (and I believe he suggested Apple create it) I'm sure it wasn't tongue in cheek. 

(less)

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

… (more)

avon b7 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

It sounds like the only advantage is that those local Norwegian banks don't allow Apple Pay. 

The major benefit is choice for the end user and with it, competition and innovation.

Apple can be bypassed completely (loosening its grip on Apple Pay, NFC revenues) but the option to remain 'all in' on Apple Pay remains should users choose to do that. 

On the Android side, Google Pay is still unable to handle the dynamic CVV on my 'rechargeable' card in spite of me having reported issues for a couple of years now. 

The solution? I use BBVA Pay and now never even consider Google Pay. 

Choice is good. 

foregoneconclusion writes, "those local Norwegian banks don't allow Apple Pay" and you replay with "choice is good." You mean the choice to not support ApplePay. How exactly is this good for anyone else but the bank. Your comment sounds like you wish the defunct CurrentC was the payment system in use at all CVS stores right now. (less)

If my bank offers its own wallet system, why should I be given the sole option of Apple Pay and know Apple takes a cut of every transaction? 

Can you provide a source for that? From what I understand, Apple gets a cut of a transaction when there is a fee applied to that transaction for using, for example, a credit card. I haven’t seen that Apple gets a cut when I’m using a bank card that takes the money from my account, like a debit card. 

No. From what I've read in the past, sources just mentioned 'cards' and often mentioned Visa and Mastercard systems. 

However, the point is that, up until now, Apple was the sole receiver of that commission. 

I don't know if Apple has ever made public its Apple Pay terms (perhaps as part of a anti-trust investigation?). 

If you would rather I said every credit card transaction I'm fine with that. 

The point remains. Apple Wallet was the sole wallet app available to users and as such the sole receiver of all commissions. 

foregoneconclusion said:

It sounds like the only advantage is that those local Norwegian banks don't allow Apple Pay. 

The major benefit is choice … (more)for the end user and with it, competition and innovation.

Apple can be bypassed completely (loosening its grip on Apple Pay, NFC revenues) but the option to remain 'all in' on Apple Pay remains should users choose to do that. 

On the Android side, Google Pay is still unable to handle the dynamic CVV on my 'rechargeable' card in spite of me having reported issues for a couple of years now. 

The solution? I use BBVA Pay and now never even consider Google Pay. 

Choice is good.  (less)

This is excellent news. My bank (BBVA) will also get on this train at some point too.

In non-payment related, iPhone NFC news, the Barcelona transport option (T-Mobilitat) will also be … (more)available for iPhones before year end, although Barcelona had to push this via the EU to get Apple to budge.  (less)